Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1887-10-22


Ian, without waiting
FOR ANY FORMAL MOTION
or application from the prisoners counsel,
said, with slow, deliberate enunciaton:
This is an application for writ OF
error to bring up for review by the Su-
preme Court of the United States iudg-
ment of the Supreme Court Of the State Of
Illinois, involving the liberty Of one of the
petitioners aud the lives OF the Others. The
time fixed for executing the sentence Of
death Is, am informed, the 11th day Of
November.
Under the circumstances it is my duty
TO facilitate an early decision Of any ques-
ton in the case of which the Supreme
Court of the United States may properly
take eognizance. II should allow writ
of error it is quite certain that counsel
would have to repeat before that Court the
argument which they propose now to make
before me. On the other hand, if l should
refuse the writ the defendants would be at
liberty to renew their application before
any other Justice Of the Supreme Court,
and as human life and liberty are involved,
that Justice might feel obliged, notwith-
standing previous refusal Of the writ, to
look into the case and
DETERMINE FOR HIMSELF
whether writ of error should be allowed.
IL he also refused, the defendants could
take the papers 10 some other member OF
the Court, and so on, until each Justice
had been applied to or until some Justice
granted the writ In this it is manifest
that delays might occur that would be
very embarrassing, in view OF the short
time intervening between this day and the
date fixed for carrying into effect the judg-
ment OF the State Court.
"As the case is one of a very serious
character in whatever aspect it may DE re-
garded, deem it proper to make an order,
which now 90, that counsel present this
application to the Court in open session,
TO the end that early and final action
may be had upon the question whether
that Court has jurisdiction to review the
Judgment in this case. There is no reason
why il may not be presented to the Court
at its session to-day. Counsel may state
that the application is made to the Court
pursuant to my direction"
The Anarchists counsel held a short
consultation and decided to briug the
matter to
THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT
at once, and so, Just before noon, Captain
Black and Mr.. Solomon, Of Chicago, Roger
A. Pryor. b. f. Butler and Randolph
Tucker, of Virginia, came into the court
room and awaited the opening of the
court.
A few moments later Roger A. Pryor
arose, presented the petition an began Al
argument urging the interference Of the
Court on behalf of his clients.
When the U. S. Supreme COnrt reaSem
bled to-day, ten minutes after the usua
hour, the eonrt room was crowded witt
people anxiously waiting to hear the peti
ton tor a writ of error in cases Of Chicag'
anarchists.
Gen. Pryor, after reciting briefly the his
tory Of the case, and stating that seven o
the prisoners were now under sentence o
death, he said he would call the attention
of the court to only two points, which h
relied upon to show that the case at thu
bar presented Federal questions, and tha
such queitiOns empowered this court t
take jurisdiction Of il and to grant the wri
of error prayed for.
The first of these points related to the
Jury by which the prisoners we're tried,
The Legislature Of the State of Illinois
passed March, 1874, that is, after the adOp
ton of the fourteenth amendment to tht
constitution, q law to regulate and govern
the empanelment of jurieS in the Seatt
courts. By virtue of that law the jury to-
the trial of criminal cases, might be made
up in part, at least, Of jurors who baC
formed an opinion with regard to the gull
OF innocence of the persons accused, juror
who were
PARFEIsL AND EVEN PREJUDICED
men. The law made il possible to pm
into the jury box men who had formed al
opinion as 10 the prisoners guilt, which
could not he removed except by stronl
evidence. This, he believed, had beer
done in the case under consideration, auC
the petitioners asserted that this statue
aud the effect given to it in the courts be
low, had deprived them of their rights
snd was about to deprive them of thei
lives without dye process of law,
guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.
1t appears of record, said Mr.. kryoE
| that this statute was called in question II
the trail rs repugnant to the provisions
both of the Federal constitution and of tn,
constitution of the state Of Illinois, bu
tie court affirmed its constitutionalltI
upon the sCthority of decisions of the Su
preme Court Of IllipCis and the latte
afterwards sustained the Judgment. Mr.
Pryor then read extracts from the recorC
to show that among the talesmen in the
trial court were Rsl who admitted tina
they had read newspapers and formed
an opinion with regard to the case, anC
were therefore partial.
Justice Miller-"Was any one of thu
Jurors shown to have read the newspspe
accounts, formed IN opinion, etc, as yor
| descrlbe?"
Mr.. Pryor replied that any man Wa!
accepted, notwithstanding the fact that h
bad formed an opinion, if he thought b
could render an impartial verdict on th'
evidence. Mr.. Pryor said il abundant!
appeared in record that at least two of tn,
jurors who aetuOlly sat in the trial wer,
persons having
PREPOSSEsSIoN AND PREJUDICEs,
Of the character described. Thus by actor
Of the lower court, be said, the Illinois
statute had been made TO deprive the &C
eused OF the right of trial By an impartia
Jury, had abridged their privileges q
citizens Of the United States ana WA
abont to deprive them of life, etc, withou
due process Of law.
The Chief Justice remarked that tn
oaiy question for this court. was whethe
the statute was constitutional. If tn
,eourt erred in its administration Of th